The interactive color maps are excellent.
The interactive color maps are excellent.
I have no idea what’s up with that article title though. Clearly there is 파랗다/파란색 etc? Edit: the title should be “languages don’t map colors exactly the same and can have more or less words for a color” would be a better title. But I think most people already know that.
Green (녹색) uses 綠. There's also 초록 which is 草綠.
赤: https://hanja.dict.naver.com/#/entry/ccko/ad2ad1893b5c49f8ab...
黃: https://hanja.dict.naver.com/#/entry/ccko/17a2b69699474d5bb8...
And various versions of the article
https://npg.si.edu/object/posts_d6c837d227c59da175620b8eaa18...
https://europepmc.org/article/pmc/pmc5635863
https://www.pnas.org/content/114/40/10785/tab-article-info
The essence of it is "how consistent are our names for colors?" Given an image if I point to this image and ask you the color for the N4 spot - what do you say?
https://images.theconversation.com/files/186280/original/fil...
I'm going to say "Blue". How many other people (who speak English natively) answer it the same?
Aside: https://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/ is also rather interesting in that domain.